God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites - What does the bible REALLY teach? (page 2)

mP

First of all, homosexuality has been around since the beginning of times. It makes no sense and is particularly dishonest to pretend that Romans is telling a disgust about a new sin. THis is the same baloney where the WTS pretends that there more earthquakes today when a simple check shows that there have always been many. In fact th emost deadly earthquakes are in China over 100 years past.

unstopableravens

irondork: i truly believe you are sincere and i never implyed different,im glad you are open to talk about this openly. you seem like a really nice guy,personally i think when you look at a verse like thisyou can make it more complicate than whats its saying, for example ill go back to what was hard for me to except, as a witness the reason hell could not be real is because god is love. so if a jw believes that a god who is love could not do that than there is no verse you could show them that would convince them. they will look at the verses and say well thats not literal,they have to change the verses to keep there idea that a loving god could never send a person to hell. they do this rather than to think that there idea of what it means that god is love may be different than what they think. i kinda see the same thing here, why would god make me this way if hes against it, so when i see these verses it has to mean something different. as far as this verses in romans 1, verse 18 it is"all" ungodliness thats gods wrath has been revealed. if you go back to verse 16 the gospel is the means of salvation to "everyone" who has faith. so verse 16 and 18 compare godliness vs un godliness for all only two groups so as we go on from here we see this is .

unstopableravens

verse 19 the truth about god is clear just from what god has shown them verse 20 there is no excuse from nature to not know god. 21-23 instead ofgiving glory and honor to god they give honor to images. 24 god gave them up ,he let them do what they wanted with was the lust in there hearts verse 25 why because the love not truth but lies and instead of worshiping the creator they worship his creation.26 yet again he let them do what they wanted what was in there hearts that was unnatural and 28 says god gave them up to a base mind amd to imporper conduct 29 shows what type of ppl they are and verse 32 whatdo they do , not only do they do these things but apporve of others doing it.(im using the revised standard version) i think its clear from context that god does not apporve of any of these things and condemns those who do because according to verrse 32 what they desrve is what?

Cold Steel

Cold Steel: Are you seriously arguing that Paul thought there was nothing unnatural about homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality and other deviant sexual practices?

Umm...no...I was seriously arguing that Paul thought there was something unnatural about homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality and other deviant sexual practices, including those involving heterosexuality.

I concede that Paul wrote some of his own personal views in his epistles; however, his views on homosexuality square with the ancient views handed down by men of God in the Old Testament. What I am saying is that according to the Law, homosexuality is unnatural. The scriptures don’t necessarily ban pedophilia; however, few would argue that pedophilia is justified under divine law. Few also would argue that it’s not a sexual deviancy.

God instituted marriage and decreed that all sexual activity outside of marriage is a serious sin. Since homosexuality is not a part of marriage, it obviously is unnatural. Nowhere in scripture is homosexuality justified; instead it is branded as “effeminate” or “unnatural” or “strange flesh.”

You may say that many homosexuals are as discreet as heterosexuals, yet based on my own experiences, a great many are flamboyant, garish, effeminate and in your face. I also couldn’t help but notice your screen name, irondork, where “dork” is obviously a vulgar slang for penis. So what’s with that? Based on my own observations, irondork, the homosexual community isn’t just a bunch of guys who like guys; they’re a subculture all their own. And with most of the ones I know, the preoccupation with their sexual proclivities can be extraordinarily crude at times. Why all the damn emphasis on sex?

Look, no one’s trying to take rights away from homosexuals; but trying to rewrite the scriptures to accommodate their lifestyles is a fallacy. Do you think any of the ancient prophets or apostles, if you could go back in time and ask them, would tell you that homosexuality would be okay as long as it wasn’t combined, or associated, with idolatry?

The scriptures are clear, and what you are proffering is no different than what Jehovah's Witnesses do with the scriptures. They take something that’s perfectly clear and then they obfuscate them to the point where they no longer mean what they appear to mean. Homosexuals simply rewrite every exegesis that’s ever been written, argue that the scriptures have been long misunderstood, get a few crosses, some chartreuse robes, buy a church building, get a ministerial certificate or two and now we’ve got another church for the Yellow Pages, this time built around sexual preference.

So that’s the problem. We sinful mortals are expected to comply with God’s commandments and not the other way around. The so-called “gay” lifestyle tends to be substantially more promiscuous and depraved than heterosexual lifestyles. That doesn’t mean heterosexual lifestyles can’t be corrupted as well and, when they are, they are every bit as abominable to the Lord. Peter warned:

For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption.... (2 Peter 2:18-19)

Corruption is defined as “to ruin utterly in character or quality,” and thus those who are the “servants of corruption” ruin “the character and quality” of the scriptures and the servants of God to their own ends, promising, through vanity and the “lusts of the flesh,” liberty to those who might have otherwise escaped those “who live in error.” Peter, in this chapter, also emphasizes that in times past God destroyed those who did the same and asks how those in the future who do it can escape similar wrath from the Lord.

irondork

Cold Steel: I also couldn’t help but notice your screen name, irondork, where “dork” is obviously a vulgar slang for penis.

Okay, CS, I give up. You win!

GromitSK

@irondork - you're wasting you're breath mate. Good try tho :)

Jeffro

There are several rather bizarre claims in Cold Steel's statements.

God instituted marriage and decreed that all sexual activity outside of marriage is a serious sin.

Did he? Do you have any proof that story is true? Do you have any proof that a god even exists?

Since homosexuality is not a part of marriage, it obviously is unnatural.

It's not part of marriage according to the definition you've chosen. Homosexuality among many animal species - including humans - is obviously 'natural'.

Nowhere in scripture is homosexuality justified; instead it is branded as “effeminate” or “unnatural” or “strange flesh.”

So what? Nowhere in scripture is slavery condemned either. Do you eat shellfish? Do you wear poly-cotton? Do you observe the Sabbath? Despite the typical cherry-picking for the odd 'nice' thing in the Bible, overall the Bible is a terrible source for human morality.

You may say that many homosexuals are as discreet as heterosexuals, yet based on my own experiences, a great many are flamboyant, garish, effeminate and in your face.

You're clearly a bigot, so why would the discreet homosexuals reveal anything about their sexuality to you? So of course your experience with homosexuals is going to be largely restricted to the 'flamboyant' ones.

I also couldn’t help but notice your screen name, irondork, where “dork” is obviously a vulgar slang for penis.

This usage of 'dork' has been considered obsolete since about the 80s. Ever since, the usual connotation is someone who is stupid, or, as in this case, a milder silliness. Similar to 'nerd' or 'geek'. But you probably already know this.

Based on my own observations, irondork, the homosexual community isn’t just a bunch of guys who like guys; they’re a subculture all their own. And with most of the ones I know, the preoccupation with their sexual proclivities can be extraordinarily crude at times. Why all the damn emphasis on sex?

Yes, because heterosexual men limit their conversations to needlework and topiary. There are various subcultures among both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

The so-called “gay” lifestyle tends to be substantially more promiscuous and depraved than heterosexual lifestyles.

When people are told, "You can't get married. Ever.", it's little wonder that there would be a tendency toward promiscuity. Not that a good number of heterosexuals aren't promiscuous as well.

God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites - What does the bible REALLY teach?

mP

unstopableravens

unstopableravens

Cold Steel

irondork

GromitSK

Jeffro

irondork

RubaDub

unstopableravens

Share this